#11: Artemis Fowl

Because I did see "Scoob!" and it was not worth watching besides looking very good.

But WHOOOOO BOY WE'RE FINALLY HERE.

After more than 15 years in development hell, Artemis Fowl is finally a movie!

And it is-


It just is.




Hong Chau was featured prominently in the first trailer (way back in November 2018), but she is absolutely not here. Perhaps she was to be Opal Koboi, who spends all of the movie in shadow.


The narration gimmick of Josh Gad's Mulch Diggums (Who is, by far, the best character here) was clearly, hastily implemented after shooting had concluded; After the first 45 minutes, it's missing until the last 5.

Lara McDonnell as Holly is the second best. It's a real shame that Nonso Anozie and Tamara Smart are afterthoughts as Domovoi and Juliet Butler, especially as they've been racebent. It feels awkward.

And finally, we have the boy himself, Artemis Fowl.

I accepted that he would not be 100% like his book counterpart.

I understand that some of the choices made - Mainly, having Artemis Fowl Sr. actually active and present in his son's life - Would change how Artemis Jr. acts.

But those things didn't have to be changed at all. The movie could have very well been made like the books - Artemis runs the estate with Domovoi Butler and his sister Juliet. They care for Angeline Fowl, his mother, who has been rendered bedridden out of despair of losing her husband, who is presumed dead.

The family gold he's using to run the estate and look for his father is winding down, so he steals a copy of the Fairy Bible from a drunken pixie and uses it to capture a female fairy police officer to hold for ransom.

The point of stories like this, with kids in unusual positions, is because it's interesting for other children to use their imaginations as they read and watch.

Movie Artemis acts like his book counterpart all of twice. Other than that, he is just any other kid, conveniently disinterested in fairy lore until it comes to ruin his day.

One moment, he's coolly dismantling a counselor's attempt to analyze him, the next he's running through the kitchen, screaming and crying. One is like the book, the other is not.

If there was more time establishing a vaguely-book-esque Artemis, the second scene would come across as a young child who has lost it, and it would make sense...in some other story.

Someone on Twitter said that Ferdia Shaw would be a much better Darren Shan in a decent "Cirque Du Freak" adaptation than as any variation of Artemis Fowl, and I agree.

The book makes it clear that Artemis is not quite right, not from any kind of empathy issue, but from simply doing what must be done.

Maybe the filmmakers knew that people were already not feeling this character change, because there are great stretches of the movie, called "Artemis Fowl", where he is not present.

This movie does a lot of erasing of its female characters. Holly's story, once tied to proving herself as capable as the only female LEPrecon officer on the force, is now part of a bigger story, including her disgraced father who betrayed the people. Angeline Fowl is dead.

"But Root is now played by Judi Dench!" That's true, and it still kind of mitigates Holly's story. Knowing the pants-pissers of planet Earth these days, maybe they changed Holly's story so people wouldn't immediately squeal "Eurgh, a GIRL FEMINIST story."

Nobody had a problem with this in the books. This movie was (re) announced in about September of 2017. I know companies were (and, to a point, still are) cowards because they don't want the smoke from a section of the internet that hates women and POC (Remember, Holly isn't white in the books. She has 'nut brown skin').

Haven, the fairy world beneath the ground, looks pretty cool, if standard, and the score is great.The fight scenes are filmed dynamically and uses cinematography tricks effectively.

Sometimes, it does include parts that were in the book - Holly capturing a troll who crashes a wedding to establish her character, Mulch being bounced out of jail by the LEPrecon to help rescue Holly, the mesmer existing, however briefly.

They wanted to hit story beats, but not character beats. Why not?

I don't dislike the movie, but I don't like it for any good reason outside of "Wow, this is so stupid, it's a lot of fun." and "Oh look, they adapted the last story from my childhood that doesn't involve a talking animal after 19 years."

It's better than "Cirque Du Freak", about on par with the "Percy Jackson" movies, and nowhere near as good as "A Monster Calls".